Okay, but you have to have—
Evidence of meeting #113 for Public Accounts in the 42nd Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was jag.
A video is available from Parliament.
Evidence of meeting #113 for Public Accounts in the 42nd Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was jag.
A video is available from Parliament.
4:10 p.m.
Liberal
4:10 p.m.
Liberal
Rémi Massé Liberal Avignon—La Mitis—Matane—Matapédia, QC
Excuse me, Mr. Chair. We sometimes get carried away when we are asking questions.
4:10 p.m.
Liberal
Rémi Massé Liberal Avignon—La Mitis—Matane—Matapédia, QC
This is to Ms. Bernatchez through you, Mr. Chair.
You developed a game plan for implementing the system. In your action plan, you targeted the 2018-2019 financial year, together with your assistant deputy minister. There will be a trial period at the beginning of January and then the system will be launched in September 2019.
In order to be able to establish a specific action plan, you probably know how many people will be using the system. If not, it would be a little difficult to establish an action plan when you do not know how many people will be using the system every day.
4:10 p.m.
Cmdre Geneviève Bernatchez
Thank you, and I am sorry for the problems with procedure. I have certainly taken note of it.
At the moment, we are not in a position to have exact numbers, because it will vary. However, we do know the number of files that the system will generally process. It's about 2,000 files per year, from the filing of the complaint until the case is completely processed.
You also need to know that the case management system will need to authorize specific access for each person involved, so that the information is protected. Not everyone will have access to all the information. If they did, the system would not be watertight and robust.
4:10 p.m.
Liberal
Rémi Massé Liberal Avignon—La Mitis—Matane—Matapédia, QC
Through you once more, Mr. Chair.
In general terms, what funding has been allocated to this system, from acquiring it to complete implementation? I am just asking for an idea of the funding that will be invested in the project.
4:10 p.m.
Cmdre Geneviève Bernatchez
The current budget for developing and implementing this system is about $450,000. Of course, there will be costs for staff training. You cannot launch a system like this without training the staff involved. We will also have to maintain the system on a regular basis. We have set aside an amount of between $79,000 and $80,000 annually to maintain the system.
As for any computerized program, we will have to update it at some stage, of course. We have also allocated funds for that.
4:10 p.m.
Liberal
Rémi Massé Liberal Avignon—La Mitis—Matane—Matapédia, QC
My last question was about managing human resources, but since that will probably take more time than I have been given, I will drop it.
Thank you.
4:10 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Kevin Sorenson
Thank you. We'll come back to you.
We'll now go to Mr. Kelly.
We're in the second round now.
4:10 p.m.
Pat Kelly Calgary Rocky Ridge, CPC
Commodore Bernatchez, much of the response to this report is all based around the implementation of the JAIM system, and yet, to the point that Mr. Nuttall made, a system merely keeps track of information. The quality of the information and the action taken from the information is really how system improvement is going to be made.
The report talked about an average of one and a half weeks to complete an investigation for summary offences, those that are handled in unit, and typically taking the average of five weeks for commanding officers to lay a charge. How do you explain that delay if a matter that is of a summary nature only takes a week and a half to investigate and then it takes five weeks to make a decision on charging? How is merely adopting a data system, a case management system, going to change that if there is this systemic delay that goes on from investigation to charge?
4:15 p.m.
Cmdre Geneviève Bernatchez
To go to the comment on ensuring that people are doing what it is that they're supposed to be doing, entirely, that's a question of ensuring that we have proper oversight and proper control over what people do.
As it pertains to unit disciplinary investigations currently being carried out, it's very difficult to predict, just like in the civilian system, how long an investigation will have to take and how long it will be carried. On the fact that it took, on average, five weeks, I don't think that we can take the time that it took to investigate as the only standard.
What is for sure though is that by reviewing the time standards—which we're currently doing with all of the military justice stakeholders including the Canadian Forces provost marshal, including representatives from the chain of command—establishing the time standards and making sure that they are part of our electronic management system and monitoring system, that will allow us to see where the choke points are. If somebody doesn't meet the time standards, they will have to indicate why, and as the superintendent, I will be able then to have access immediately to these results to identify where the vulnerabilities are, where the challenges are, and go to the heart and the roots of the reasons why it is taking longer than expected. Is it an issue of training, for example, for unit disciplinary investigations? Do our unit investigators need more training in order to be able to do their jobs more efficiently? Is it a question of resourcing by units that are deployed on operations and have not the flexibility to allocate sufficient resources for investigations?
These are the types of things that will be yielded by the justice administration information management system.
4:15 p.m.
Calgary Rocky Ridge, CPC
Forgive me as a non-lawyer, but it would seem that if in a week and a half you have the facts from an investigation, I just cannot grasp why it takes three and a half times as long to gather the information to decide yes or no on whether to proceed with a charge.
4:15 p.m.
Cmdre Geneviève Bernatchez
I fully get the nature of your question. One has to ask why it does take so long to investigate. This is not unique to the military justice system.
4:15 p.m.
Calgary Rocky Ridge, CPC
No, I'm not asking why. I'm talking about the difference between just deciding what to do when an investigation is complete.
4:15 p.m.
Cmdre Geneviève Bernatchez
Pardon me.
4:15 p.m.
Calgary Rocky Ridge, CPC
About the average time, it says on average, units completed the investigation within one and a half weeks, but commanding officers took an additional five weeks on average to lay charges. I'm skeptical that merely adopting a software system will change the behaviours that cause that delay.
4:15 p.m.
Deputy Minister, Department of National Defence
If I may respond, you're absolutely highlighting a point that we haven't brought out.
Obviously for us, the system will help provide information to us, but if the underlying human behaviour doesn't change and we don't prioritize investigations and we don't train commanding officers differently and ensure that they give this kind of work and their responsibilities in the system for discipline the attention it needs, nothing will change other than the JAG will have better information about what's going wrong.
Therefore, there has to be a systemic view and investment in commanding officers and everybody who plays a part in this system to ensure that they understand their responsibilities. Certainly this audit is a first step in that. The JAG has a role, the chief of the defence staff has a role, the department has a role, as do commanding officers across the system. It is critical that we change human behaviour in this process.
4:15 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Kevin Sorenson
I think the part of the problem we're having a hard time with is the fact that the Auditor General said in his report that there are other reviews that have taken place. I would assume there have been people from the department who have come here and said much the same thing.
What we have to try to do is to somehow instill in the department the fact that we just can't keep doing an Auditor General report and having you come back. I'm sure that they make great claims and promises too, yet the next one shows that nothing has been accomplished. That's why we have action plans and we follow them up. If timelines aren't met, we get you back here and it's not nearly as nice.
We'll now go to Ms. Yip.
4:20 p.m.
Liberal
Jean Yip Liberal Scarborough—Agincourt, ON
Thank you for coming.
Once again on the timeline question, why is the office of the judge advocate general undertaking its first formal reviews of the military justice system in September 2019? Why is it not happening sooner?
4:20 p.m.
Deputy Minister, Department of National Defence
I think we're starting the testing of the system in 2019.
We're implementing the system in 2019.
4:20 p.m.
Liberal
Jean Yip Liberal Scarborough—Agincourt, ON
Okay.
Is your first priority the implementation of this whole system?
4:20 p.m.
Deputy Minister, Department of National Defence
If I may, and I'll ask the commodore to jump in, we're doing a number of things in parallel. We're reviewing the process, implementing the system and extending the posting period of the officers who work for Commodore Bernatchez in the JAG. She's also reviewing training and all the policies and procedures that have to do with military justice. A number of those, as she mentioned at the beginning of her statement, have already been implemented in order to respond.
There is a range of activities being done. We highlight the system because without data, we can't provide the kind of oversight and data management that the Auditor General says is lacking without all these millions of Excel spreadsheets, which we would like to get away from. The system will be fully implemented in September 2019. We will start to test it in January 2019, along with a number of other activities to change behaviour and to ensure that proper training exists and that the prosecutors and the lawyers in the system are able to conduct their duties as required of them.